Iraqi Elections

[El Blanco]

The date is the 30th, right? That gives us about a week for doom and gloom predictions. Lets all call for the end of the world and then see what materializes.

Personally, I think the next seven days will show us some of the most desperate and viscious fighting most of us have ever witnessed.

Shit on the level of the Japanese after Midway and the Tet Offensive.

However, just like those two examples, the attacks will utlimatly be colossal failures. The elections will be held, leaders will be chosen, and Iraq can become its own country.

Will insurgents keeps fighting? Undoubtedly. Will it be anything like we've seen latly or will see for the next week? No.

As for the result of the elections: Some wil be elated, some will be pissed, but IRaq, and the world as a whole will probably accept the outcome and try and build from there.

[Immortal Goat]

My question is, what if they elect someone that Bush doesn't like? We just gonna bomb them again? We are not liked over there, and the chances of these elections being successful (at least in our favor) are slim to none. Iraq has always been, and will always be, a shithole.

[El Blanco]

It was a shithole when European Imperialism hit it. Even after that, it had a few good stretches.

What I never understood is why some intellectuals keep saying how since the Middle East has not had any real history in democracy, it can't be acheived, yet they keep drolling on about how we have to intervene and bring democracy to the old soviet republics.

You want to talk about a shithole, look at what some of those people have been through.

[mburbank]

There will be an election, if you can call one sided voting taking place in two thrids of the country with no way of monitoring and no way of verifying the count an election. There will be a result which we will, at least initially nto only back, but applaud. The violence, in my estimation will then turn from an 'insurgency' to a 'civil war'. It won't have to change in any way to do that, it will be a fact as soon as it's a war against a government, legitimate or not, instead of against an occupying force.

I'm curious to see what we do if whoever wins asks us to leave, either immediately or on a timetable. I don't thik that will happen, because I'm guessing we're going to be pretty heavily involved in collecting the votes and providing 'security' for the count.

My prediction? We'll get Ilawi entrenched. That should give us a good ten years before he fulfills the path most strongmen who we've given power to and he turns on us and we have to pretend we had nothing to do with his rise to power and invade the country. But this will at least free us up to invade Iran. Maybe by the tikme we need to overthrow Iraq again, we can have our installed striong man in Iran still only halfway to becoming our enemy.

[El Blanco]

There will be a result which we will, at least initially nto only back, but applaud. The violence, in my estimation will then turn from an 'insurgency' to a 'civil war'. It won't have to change in any way to do that, it will be a fact as soon as it's a war against a government, legitimate or not, instead of against an occupying force.


You don't go from insurgency to civil war. An isurgency is when outside forces come in to fight. These aren't Iraqis leading the charge.

I have no illusions about the time immediatly before and after the elctions. They will be bloodbaths. But, I see that burning itsel out.

The Iraqi people as a whole just won't go along with it. They have little reason ot believe that some asshole from Pakistan who is sending suicide bombers into mosques has more of their interests in mind than the Americans there fighting the insurgents.

[mburbank]

"These aren't Iraqis leading the charge"

That, my friend, is a seriously debated topic. Who they are and how many of them and why they're fighting is something that a lot of people have a lot of different ideas about.

And what about the Kurds, who may not like loosing autonomy after ten years? I don't think these folks are incapable of democracy inherently, but I'm not sure that's what anyone has in mind for them in any case.

I think if Sunnis have no way to vote and Shiites sweep the election, (which seems likely to me) it's going to be unlikely the Sunnis will say "Oh, well, it's all for the greater good of Iraq".

Maybe the shiites will work really hard to give the Sunnis a fair shake and find a way for the Kurds to be sort of autonomus. But so far they can't even get a police force together. My guess is Alawi is going to try to make what we did in Faluja look like a sunday school tea party, becaue that's traditionally how power has been solidified in Iraq.

I would really, really like for something good to come out of this. I'll just be hugely surprised.

[Anonymous]

I think the elections will go over without a hitch. Totally.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

My question is, what if they elect someone that Bush doesn't like? We just gonna bomb them again?

To my understanding, they will be electing regional members of parliament. If I'm right, that should mean the PM will get elected from within the newly elected parliament, unless the interim government stipulated somewhere that the PM would be directly elected by the people.

Since the votes are across, Iraq, there will undoubtedly be folks elected who we hate, those we like, and those whom we fear even holding such power. IMO, that's what it's all about, and it's that kind of diversity in thoughts and approaches that Iraq finally needs in order to thrive.

[GAsux]

Good job Kev. They're actually electing a 300+ member body. So in a way, it's possible for everyone to win without anything actually being accomplished.


Rather than having regional tribal control throughout the country, you'll have elected regional tribal control, centered in Baghdad. For those already oppossed, they will continue to view the elections as nothing more than a fraud perpetrated upon them by America. Which in all fairness it really is. Kind of ironic that our version of "freedom" means them accepting the political process we think they should have eh?

The Admin will hail it as a huge success, citing the fact that Iraqis have more freedom than ever, because now they can "choose" the people who run their neighborhoods. I anticipate the level of violence to stay the same. While the pace has certianly increased, the scale has stayed relatively the same. There have been no catastrophic attacks to this point.

The "insurgents", be they disaffected Iraqis or angry non_Iraqi Arabs fighting for their cause will continue to attempt to destabilize the civil functions of the country. No paper parliament with "elected" officials is going to stop them.

[davinxtk]

Iraq has always been, and will always be, a shithole.

What the fuck.
You really don't know much about Iraq pre-war, do you?

This place wasn't Afghanistan. It didn't look freshly fucking shelled out and destroyed before we shelled and destroyed it. Saddam may have been a complete piece of shit politically, but economically he knew what he was doing. Baghdad was a thriving metropolis; Fallujah, while it was never the best neighborhood, wasn't the hotbed of insurgent activity it turned into.

This wasn't a desert country that had been raped by the Soviets and completely pummelled into the stone age on their way out.
This was a sovereign nation with an economy and laws.



Whatever 'shithole' it is now, we did to it.

[Immortal Goat]

Yes, it was a thriving city, that wasn't the kind of shithole I was talking about. Before, it was a shithole in that it was an opressive government. Now, it is a shithole in that we bombed it and it has no government at all.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

I think it might be more important to note that the Iraqi people just might have the power to decide the fate of their "shithole." Whatever we did to them can be rebuilt and improved upon, whether or not they're Kurds, Shia, or Sunni. That may not have been the case were Saddam still there.....

[davinxtk]

Any way you cut the shit-hole to look at it, I certainly hope this is the outcome:


Good job Kev. They're actually electing a 300+ member body. So in a way, it's possible for everyone to win without anything actually being accomplished.

[Dole]

Its not much of an election when candidates are unable to campaign or publicise themselves at all for fear of getting killed, voters are afraid to vote for fear of violent reprisals, and most of the eligible voting public are completely unaware who the candidates actually are.

[El Blanco]

Good job Kev. They're actually electing a 300+ member body. So in a way, it's possible for everyone to win without anything actually being accomplished.

Not to be cynical, but isn't that just about every democratically elected government?

[mburbank]

The thing I like the best is that in many cases, the names of the candidates remain a closely guarded secret. How the hell do you decide to vote for someone if you don't know who they are?

[El Blanco]

Is the party known? Mabye you vote for the party and not the candidate. Not much better, but it isn't totally blind.

[mburbank]

I think the parties are known, and that a couple of days before the election they're posting names, but they are a LOT of parties and I don't know how well they are known.

The main reason the various parties and what they represent hasn't been covered in the media is unless something is happening in the green zone it's pretty much unsafe to cover.

is the 'international zone' the same as the 'green zone'? Cause I heard that's where the votes will be transported for tabulation.

[Dole]

Exhaustive article on who is running, who is boycotting the elections:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4051977.stm

[mburbank]

Thank you, sir. That was about as informative as I've been able to find.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Good job Kev. They're actually electing a 300+ member body. So in a way, it's possible for everyone to win without anything actually being accomplished.

Not to be cynical, but isn't that just about every democratically elected government?

Yes, and maybe I'm wrong, but I think GAsux was referring to that as a good thing. Everybody from every party and of every ideology can win and go home happy, but nobody gets put in front of firing squads the next day, or nobody feels compelled to emigrate somewhere else due to the results (we hope).

I think the argument that this isn't a truly free election because people are scared, yada yada, is a bit overstated. Of course they're scared. These "insurgents" publicly executed two election workers in the middle of the street a few weeks ago. People SHOULD be scared.

But that doesn't mean the vote shouldn't happen, and it also doesn't mean people aren't campaigning. I mean, let's be honest, at this point in the game, you can probably look at the regions, observe who's running, and call who's gonna win. That's fine. It's called a party machine, and our country functioned that way for the better part of the 20th Century.

Nothing will be perfect, nothing will go smoothly, and there will most certainly be something to critique the next day. But hopefully, this will be a HUGE step forward towards whatever the right direction may be for Iraqis. And also hopefully, maybe for the first time, it'll be them who decides that course, rather than the British, or the French, or the U.S., or some Arab monarchy, or another Saddam Hussein.

And hopefully, one day, we can go to war with the democratic republic of Iraq. :)

[Abcdxxxx]

Pre-baathist Iraq was hardly even close to being a shithole.

[Ant10708]

Apparently today the Iraqi newspapers finally revealed the names of all particpants. So we should be able to expect some assassinations of like the 700 people running

[Dole]

But that doesn't mean the vote shouldn't happen, and it also doesn't mean people aren't campaigning. I mean, let's be honest, at this point in the game, you can probably look at the regions, observe who's running, and call who's gonna win. That's fine. It's called a party machine, and our country functioned that way for the better part of the 20th Century.


That sounds a touch optimistic Kev

[mburbank]

I actually just barely do support these elections, because I think it's the only way we'll ever have a shot at getting out of there, and I think us getting out of there is the only hope they have of ever being able to form a legitimate government.

But, I don't think this is going to be about them choosing anything. No monitors, no voting in areas not controlled by US forces, votes to be counted under our protection and by people we picked...

If there's any outcome where a bunch of people who aren't our puppets and who didn't 'used' to be on the CIAS payroll (We do all know that Allawi worked for the CIA for years, yes?) come out on top I will be very, very, very plesantly surprised.

You know how we'll know if they elections are legitimate? If the winners form a coalition just long enough to ask us to get out. Because taht is the only way I can think of for whichever multiple parties win to establish any kind of legitimacy. Who in Iraq or the region will believe their officials are NOT American puppets if they don't ask us to leave?

[KevinTheOmnivore]

That sounds a touch optimistic Kev

Of course it's optimistic, but what other option is there? Should we instead be critical of every possible solution, just pack up, head home, and hope that Iraq fixes herself?

That's not going to happen. Whether or not you agreed with the invasion, which I did not, I think we need to be a little bit more supportive of the occupation. The kidnappings and road side bombings are never going to stop, and if we were to delay the elections, then you can BET they'd never stop, because the so-called insurgents would then know that their methods are effective.

And Max, I agree that we will be keeping a close eye on the results, but I pray that we have no intentions of fucking with those results. Sadr's party/coalition/whatever has it on their platform that if they win, we need to leave. If they gain a majority in their government, and they vote that through, then I hope we would honor it. Not because it's necessarily right, or that Sadr himself isn't a vile killer, but b/c them deciding to kick us out democratically, after we've fought and died to give them that ability, in my mind, is what this should all be about.

[Ant10708]

Iraqi election views:

Nabil Haithem, 22, tea house worker
"I am very happy with the elections. Of course I am voting and I am voting for Allawi. He is our man. He is a strong man that the Iraqis need. All this violence will end when a strong Iraqi government is elected."I am very proud that for the first time in our history in Iraq and the Arab world free democratic elections are taking place."

Alliya al-Hussien (Left), 60, fish seller
"Who cares about elections? Look at the situation - no electricity, no water. Solve these problems and then elections. With Zarqawi and his people who can go and vote. My son is a policeman. He left his job and his good salary because of the violence."All we care about now is our living conditions. When Saddam was gone we said life will get better. Nothing happened. Allawi came and nothing happened, and after the elections nothing will happen.

Suad Mizban, 32, poultry seller
"We will vote for whoever can bring security and jobs.
"The government should have provided fuel and security before worrying about elections, but still it is much better than Saddam’s time, at least now we have freedom and can vote for anyone we like before it was Saddam and that is it

Mahmoud al-Rassam, 25, student
"I will not take part of these elections. How can we have elections when the occupation forces have their boots over our necks? What kind of election will it be when most Iraqis are not participating? This is just an American plot to hand the government to their agents and say this is your government.
"Iraq will be like Iran and civil war will take place. These elections are a big joke, I feel ashamed of all those Iraqis deceived by the American propaganda."

Ayoub Sadoon, 70, retired
"Everyone in Iraq just wants one thing; we want to have a stable prosperous state."It doesn’t really matter who wins, what matters is building this country in the way that God and his prophet want. It would have been better to have elections in peaceful times. Those terrorist will kill lots of people on election day with their bombs."

Haj Adnan Rifa’e, 64, shop owner
"If these elections deliver peace and security then they're fien by me. I have seen many things in my life and this will be just another scene. "I won't let any of my family vote. It's too dangerous to go out in the streets and later the Americans will bring in whoever they want anyway."

Hussien abdul-Zahra, 20, labourer
"I will vote. This is the first time the Shia will be in charge in Iraq. After the elections the Americans should leave the country.
"I don’t know who I'll vote for. I like Allawi, but I think the Shia list should win because it is backed by Ayatollah Sistani."

Omar Nai’em, 43, electrician
"All these banners and posters are a big lie. Those people running for elections are agents of the foreigners - the Iranians, Americans and the Israelis. It is not the intimidation that is preventing the people from voting. It's the lies."They claimed that Saddam was a dictator, but what is Allawi now? He is the same - an American stooge and a dictator."

Muhanad Salman (Right) 38, civil servant
"We all have to participate and play a role in these great democratic elections We will never defeat terrorism if we keep hiding in our homes."When we had elections before, it was a big joke. Now there many parties and many choices. It is like a real election anywhere in the world, where the right people become the ministers not the president’s brother."

Um Hussein, 55, orange seller
"How can we not vote when Ayatollah Sistani ordered us to do so. Elections must be good for us because the Sayed won’t order us to do something if it is not right.
"Hopefully after the elections a God fearing government will come to power and things should be fine. We have suffered a lot under Saddam and now because of this Zarqawi we need peace and good life."

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Sounds like a country ready for a vote to me. Thanks, Ant.

[Dole]

Kev, of course I am not saying they shouldnt be having an election or that its not a good idea, its just it doesnt look like much of an election when people are scared to vote, dont know who is standing etc etc - its far from ideal.

[davinxtk]

"We all have to participate and play a role in these great democratic elections We will never defeat terrorism if we keep hiding in our homes."When we had elections before, it was a big joke. Now there many parties and many choices. It is like a real election anywhere in the world, where the right people become the ministers not the president’s brother."

*COUGH COUGH COUGH HACK HACK COUGH*

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Kev, of course I am not saying they shouldnt be having an election or that its not a good idea, its just it doesnt look like much of an election when people are scared to vote, dont know who is standing etc etc - its far from ideal.

Right, but I think this is the problem with the "progressive" political outlook in general. Now I can't say much about England, but here, we just had roughly 60% of the eligible voters actually vote in 2004. And that was a record, unseen for decades. They're saying they may get a 40% or higher turnout in Iraq. Women couldn't vote in this country until 1920. 1/3 of the candidates in this Iraqi election will be women.

Progress takes time, and for a muslim country that just two years ago this time was being ruled by a dictator, this is a big step for them. Of course it won't be ideal, but expecting the ideal from this situation right now much be a tad bit unrealistic.

[El Blanco]

Well, I don't know when they close, but the polls opened and one estimate I heard was a 70% turnout over all. Sunni areas seem to be a little lower, but that was expected.

I have no idea who is winning ar anything like that, only that so far, there have been no major attacks or anything (damn, I just jinxed it).

Anyone have anything they'd like to share?

[Ant10708]

Afghanstan's election went well and this went not as well but I think it can be called a success. We'll have to wait and see if there was any mass voter fraud or some shit.

Surprising that the 'insurgents' didn't go full out. Just seems like a perfect day to complete Allah's wish and blow up a polling station.

[Ant10708]

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Jan. 30 - After a slow start, voters turned out in very large numbers in Baghdad today, packing polling places and creating a party atmosphere in the streets as Iraqis here and nationwide turned out to cast ballots in the country's first free elections in 50 years.

American officials were showing confidence that today was going to be a big success, despite attacks in Baghdad and other parts of the country that took at least two dozen lives. The Interior Ministry said 36 people had been killed in attacks, Agence France-Presse reported.

But the violence did not seem to have deterred most Iraqis. In Baghdad, Basra in the South, the holy Shiite city of Najaf and even the restive Northern city of Mosul, Iraqi civilians crowded the polling sites, navigating their way through tight security and sometimes proudly displaying the deep blue ink stain on their fingers that confirmed they had voted.

The chairman of the Independent Election Commission of Iraq, Fareed Ayar, said as many as 8 million people turned out to vote, or between 55 percent and 60 percent of those registered to cast ballots. If 8 million turns out to be the final figure, that would represent 57 percent of voters.

The figure was based on national returns, Mr. Ayar said, and included the provinces of Anbar and Nineveh, which have large Sunni populations. The predicted low turnout in Anbar, a hotspot of Sunni resistance to the American occupation, was exceeded to such an extent that extra voting materials had to be rushed to outlying villages, where long lines were formed at polling stations, Mr. Ayar said.

Polling stations closed at 5 p.m. Iraqi time, or 9 a.m Eastern time.

Preliminary voting figures are expected to be known Monday or Tuesday, although final results will not be available for about 10 days.

In Washington, President Bush called the election a "resounding success" and asserted that "by participating in free elections, the Iraqi people have firmly rejected the anti-democratic ideology of the terrorists."

A sobering note came later in the day. A British C-130 Hercules military transport plane crashed near Balad, 35 miles northwest of Baghdad, a Ministry of Defense spokesman in London said. The spokesman said the plane crashed at 5:25 p.m. Iraqi time.

Prime minister Tony Blair said that British military personnel were killed, but he did not specify how many."This country and the wider world will never forget them," he said.

The streets of Baghdad were closed to traffic, but full of children playing soccer, and men and women walking, some carrying babies. Everyone, it seemed, was going to vote. They dropped their ballots into boxes even as continuous mortar shells started exploding at about noon.

Thirty civilians and six police officers died in mortar attacks and suicide bombings around the country, the Interior Minister reported, according to A.F.P. Twenty-two of the deaths occurred in Baghdad, Reuters reported, where mortar attacks took three lives and 19 people were killed by suicide bombers. At least 29 were wounded in the attacks in the capital, Reuters said.

But if the insurgents wanted to stop people in Baghdad from voting, they failed. If they wanted to cause chaos, they failed. The voters were completely defiant, and there was a feeling that the people of Baghdad, showing a new, positive attitude, had turned a corner.

No one was claiming that the insurgency was over or that the deadly attacks would end. But the atmosphere in this usually grim capital, a city at war and an ethnic microcosm of the country, had changed, with people dressed in their finest clothes to go to the polls in what was generally a convivial mood.

"You can feel the enthusiasm," Col. Mike Murray of the First Cavalry Regiment, said outside a polling station in Karada, who added that the scene in Karada was essentially true for the whole area.

In Khadamiya, a mixed area in northwest Baghdad, the turnout was also large, with some representatives of political parties saying the turnout could approach 80 percent.

Even in the so-called Sunni Triangle people voted, too. In Baquba, 60 miles north of Baghdad, all the polling stations that reported indicated a huge turnout.

In Mosul, the restive city to the north, large turnouts were reported, even in the Sunni Muslim areas, and despite threats and scattered attacks with bombs, mortars and small arms fire.

"They didn't hit," Brig. Gen. Carter Ham, the American commander in Mosul, said after he arrived at the election coordination center. "But that is what we think they were trying to do."

By late afternoon, Maj. Anthony Cruz, the American liaison officer with the electoral commission in Mosul, said that there were thousands of voters appearing at each polling center "across the board."

There were no reports of violence in Najaf, the holiest city to Shiites, where turnout appeared to be good and there was also a festive air. The city is home to Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, and posters of the Ayatollah beseeching people to vote could be seen all over the city.

One voter, Musel Aziz, 36, said: "I and my people have taken part in this election. We want to lead a normal life, just like people in neighboring countries."

In Ramadi, only six people had voted after seven hours at a polling station on the south side of the Euphrates River across from the town. Many people were apparently intimidated at crossing the bridge over the river, because potential voters would make themselves highly visible.

Lieut. Col. Joseph Southcott, of the 1/9 Battalion of the Second Infantry Division, which has been brought in from South Korea, said he and his men would judge their success not by the turnount, which appeared to be less than 1 percent, but whether they had created safe conditions to vote.

Units of the division, which crossed the bridge into the city, found men and boys on street corners, who shouted "Inshallah!" but showed no signs of hostility.

Several explosions broke out across Baghdad this morning, especially in the southwestern section of the city. American attack helicopters circled over the city center, and the roar of fighter jets could be heard from high above.

Qasim Muhammad Saleh, 45, walking with his two sons, Sajad, 5, and Jowid, 12, had just come from voting at Lebanon High School in Karada. The boys were carrying Iraqi flags, and Mr. Saleh's right index finger carried the ink marks showing he had cast his ballot.

"We now have our freedom," he said. "After 35 years, we finally got rid of Saddam and now we can vote for whoever we want.

"After casting my ballots, I'm hoping that the situation will improve."

Nearby, at the Nawfal primary school in Karada, there was a steady stream of people lining up to go through the barbed wire checkpoint in order to vote. Inside, people were shrugging off the sounds of explosions, and the mood was upbeat, even enthusiastic, as they went through the voting process.

Voters appeared to be turning out in large numbers in the Kurdish area of northern Iraq, especially in Sulaimaniya, where attacks have been muted, news agencies reported. But there were complaints from four Kurdish districts outside of Mosul that they did not receive ballot boxes or supplies, fueling the suspicion among Kurds in those areas that the government was trying to suppress their influence on the vote.

In the Southern city of Basra, where Shiites dominate, and where violence has been minimal, voting went smoothly. People filled the streets expressing pride and defiance as they headed to vote. Election officials there predicted roughly a two-thirds turnout among eligible voters.

The election will create the basis here for the rise to power of a Shiite-dominated government for the first time in the country's 85-year history. But the chaotic situation on the ground seemed to render most predictions about the future composition of the government tenuous at best.

The turnout, and the ease with which the election is carried off, are regarded as major tests of the Bush administration's goal of planting a democratic government in the heart of the Middle East, and for its hopes to stabilize this country and eventually bring 155,000 American troops home. Mr. Bush, in his weekly radio address on Saturday, said he expected the insurgents to do everything possible to thwart the voting because free elections would "expose the emptiness of their vision for Iraq."

The election is one of a number of landmarks intended by Iraqi leaders and American officials to set up a democratic state here, following the destruction of Saddam Hussein's government in the spring of 2003. Iraqi voters will elect a 275-member national assembly, which will be empowered to write the country's permanent constitution. After that task, to be completed in the autumn, voters will choose a full-term national assembly in December.

Iraqi voters will also be selecting provincial parliaments, and the Kurds in the north will be voting for candidates to the regional government there that was set up after the Persian Gulf war in 1991






Its from the NY Times[/url]